new BRTS seminar | Bus | Public Transport

Introduction

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is commonly understood as a system that emphasizes priority for and rapid movement of buses by securing segregated busways, although there is no precise definition of what constitutes a BRT system (Wright 2005). Policy makers in some of the large cities in Asia recently started to consider BRT as an option for their urban transport. On 15 January 2004, the TransJakarta busway was started along a 12.9 km corridor through the city centre. On 1 July 2004, BRT corridors were installed as a part of Seoul’s reform of its public transport system. On 25 December 2004, the first stage commercial operation of BRT was started in Beijing. In those new BRT systems in Asia, on 3rd December 2006 in Pune in India BRT track of 5.5km opened to the public. Some influences can be found from existing BRT systems such as Curitiba and Bogotá and evidence shows that those Asian cities actually learned lessons from the Latin American countries. This research aims to uncover the reason why introduction of BRTs in Asia was accelerated around 2004 from the perspective of lessondrawing by comparing the policy processes in Four Asian cities.

2. Background
2.1. Historical development of BRT in the world
The first wide-scale development of the BRTs started in Curitiba (Brazil) in 1974, although there were several smaller-scale projects prior to its development. Since then, Curitiba’s experience has inspired other cities to develop similar systems. In the 1970s, development of BRT systems was limited to the North and South American continent. In the late 1990s, the replication of the BRT concept gained momentum and BRT systems were opened in Quito, Equador (1996), Los Angeles, USA (1999) and Bogotá, Columbia (2000). Especially, the TransMilenio project in Bogotá started operation in 2000 and its success drew attention from the world community as an example of the state of the art in BRT systems.

2.2. BRT Introduction in Asia
In Asia, prior to 2000, the experience of BRTs was very limited in number and scope. The systems in Nagoya, Japan and Taipei were regarded as relatively complete systems in the Asian region (Wright 2005). The spread of BRT in Asia has become more conspicuous since 2004. In 2004, the TransJakarta busway was started along through the city centre (Hook and Ernst 2005). On 1 July 2004, three BRT corridors totalling about 37 km were installed as a part of Seoul’s reform of its public transport system (Pucher et al. 2005). On 25 December 2004, the first stage commercial operation of BRT was started in Beijing as a pilot line for 5 km (Chang 2005). In Bangkok, the plan for BRT was declared in 2004 by the newly elected governor of Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) indicating that the first BRT lines would be opened in October 2005. Although there was some confusion in Indonesia and Seoul when those lines were first introduced, the BRTs in Jakarta, Seoul, and Beijing have shown some success and those systems are under the process of expansion and upgrading. In India the first BRT project was installed in

Limitation of BRT However. It has been pointed out that BRTs cannot succeed if police enforcement is not strict. Though it didn’t get mark able success as much was expected form it. such as promotion of non-motorised transport and integrated feeder services. 2.3. After that Indian govt. based on experiences in real-world conditions. Experiences from the U. Another important factor for success understanding of planning and design elements.S. Relationship of BRT to other modes is a crucial factor for the success of BRT: BRT cannot bring success as a stand-alone policy and effectiveness depends on the presence of complementary transport options. decided to make another BRT project in nine more city under the Jawaharlal Nehru New Urban Renovation Mission (JNNURM).Pune city of Maharashtra state as pilot project of the country it was installed in 3rd December 2006 to public. effectiveness of BRT is not always permanent. cities such as Shirley Busway in Washington and El Monte Busway in Los Angels show that pressures by automobile interests are threat to the existence of BRT. citing the examples of Philadelphia and Mexico. .

no-transfer rides to multiple destinations. BRT uses rubber-tired vehicles that are easy to board and comfortable to ride. BRT’s high-frequency. vehicles. . Research framework 3.3. They can be laid out to provide direct. Components Running ways Description BRT vehicles operate primarily in fast and easily identifiable exclusive transit-ways or dedicated bus lanes. (2003). Table 2 lists the details of the BRT systems in Jakarta. Vehicles may also operate in general traffic. services. often colour-coded routes. and Beijing according to the Components described in Table 2. Wright (2005) defines it as a “bus-based mass transit system that delivers fast.1. They are also conveniently located and integrated into the community they serve. It shows that while the systems meet the basic components of BRT to some degree. In Levinson et al. reducing time in stations. high-capacity vehicles carry many people and use clean fuels to protect the environment. Quiet. Components or features of BRT in those two references are summarised in Table 1. Fare Collection Simple BRT fare collection systems make it fast and easy to pay. and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) elements into an integrated system with a strong positive identity that evokes a unique image”. are attractive and easily accessible. Definitions and Scope Bus rapid transit (BRT) There is no precise definition of BRT. The integration of local and express service can reduce long-distance travel times. Stations Vehicles Services Route Structure BRT uses simple. all-day service means less waiting and no need to consult schedules. Seoul. it is defined as “a flexible. often before you even get on the bus. They allow multiple door boarding. comfortable. rubber-tired rapid-transit mode that combines stations. running ways. BRT stations. ranging from enhanced shelters to large transit centers. and cost-effective urban mobility”.

Stations provide an elevated platform for rapid boarding. Normal diesel bus which is not well maintained Service headway is 0 to 1min at peak period and 2 to 3 min at off-peak periods.5-km fully physically segregated median busway corridor from Katraj bus depo to swargate bus depo. . This system is not being adopted.5 km length Fare is collected in bus itself. It is straight road and having 14 bus stop in 5..Components Running ways Stations Vehicles Services Route Structure Fare Collection ITS Description 5.

4 BRTS in India under construction The increasing need for urban mass transit mobility is now being addressed various cities in India. BRTS proposals are in various stages of appraisal and implementation Ahmedabad. This has added to the flow and density of traffic in Delhi. Indore. Pune: Pune is a city with a growing population of about 2.000 passengers are there demanding an efficient public transport system. ! First contract for detailing 5 corridors in Delhi was awarded to TRIPP and RITES in 2003 and tenders were called in 2005.000 buses ply on the roads of Pune with a modal share of public transport at 13-20% only traveling an average distance of about 7 km. flexible and economic. Delhi. Bhopal. versatile. Pune and Vishakapatnam. Jaipur. BRTS planning started in 2003-04 and potential corridors were identified for . public transport. About 1. following the best practices in the world. was formed in 2006 to manage the BRTS and other mass transit systems in Delhi. A potential 600. the Transit System (BRTS) also known as the High Capacity Bus System increasingly being adopted by cities in India. The Delhi BRTS expects to introduce sleek. Phase one comprising seven corridors has been taken up for BRTS operations.5 million trips are generated every day in Pune. The Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) which aims to reforms and fast track planned development in 63 cities does consider projects field of urban.4 million spread over an area of about 244 sqkm. ! Contract was awarded to BSC and C&C joint venture for constructing the first corridor in 2006. ! A Special Purpose Vehicle. modern buses with Intelligent Telecommunication Systems (ITS) and additional facilities for nonmotorized modes along a new corridor. this is a part of the transport plan that covers a total of 37 corridors comprising 500 km for road-based mass transit like BRTS. Safe. Delhi: Delhi with a population of 14 million (2001) is expanding and comprises an urban continuum including of a number of growing townships in Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. The Delhi Integrated Multi-Modal Transport System (DIMTS). monorail and Light Rail Transit(LRT). About 2.

This has been so successful that now buses with Passenger Information Systems (PIS) and fully automated ticketing machines now operate in the city.5 million.1 and it generated an estimated 1.000 mini buses. Ahmedabad: Ahmedabad with a population of 45 million (2001) has a total vehicle population of 1.000 buses ply on these roads and close to 60% share is of public transport in the region. A network of about 120 km is planned for BRTS by 2010 at a cost of Rs. of which . A pilot project of 13. (ICTSL) was set up to operate and manage the public transport system in Indore with private sector participation to overcome financial constraints.4 million registered motor vehicles with a per capita trip rate of 1. central bus lanes (at grade) are planned on these corridors to increase the carrying capacity by 50%. Indore: Indore has an estimated population of about 1.8 million and is spread over an area of 134 sqkm.164 million. 10. It has about 0. 8.82 million registered motor vehicles (2004). There are some 150 buses and about 13. 4.3 million trips are bus based traveling an average distance of about 6. A pilot project of 11. About 6. About 40% of the trips are made by public transport and around 0. A pilot corridor of 12 km for Rs. Jaipur: Jaipur is a medium sized city with a population of about 2.8 million total trips.682 million. The entire process is planned in concert with an integrated cycle master plan. It has about 0.the phase wise implementation of the BRTS. Suitably barriered.762 million has been approved for the construction of another 52.45km was approved for about 985 million and is expected to be implemented towards the end of 2006. 623 million has already been approved and work has started on the stretch between Solapur and Satara road. About 130 km has been identified for a total block cost estimate of about Rs.5 km before the start of the Youth Commonwealth Games to be held in 2008.2 km at a cost of Rs. The Indore City Transport Services Ltd.0 km.3 million (2006) spread over an area of 411 kms (2001). 880 million is now under construction and detailed designs of phase one for 46km is now under active preparation as approved by the Ministry of Urban Development under JNNURM.

Bhopal planning area consists of 601 sq km. The other corridors will be identified in the new master plan. It is estimated to increase the modal share from ~20% to 40-50% with 500 new buses. The total number of motorized registered vehicles was 209.000 people per hour per direction (pphpd). A meager 13-19% trips are by city buses covering an average distance of about 9 km. It has a total population of 1. BRTS is to be introduced on an experimental basis along a 2 km stretch between NAD-Kotha road and Gopalapatnam.70% are 2 wheelers. Visakhapatnam: Visakhapatnam (Vizag) is a port city in Andhra Pradesh. previous outskirts like Gajuwaka and Madhurawada into the city limits. Planning for BRTS has just been initiated. The total trips here were estimated to be 2. BRTS is planned for a total length of 230 km which is expected to increase to 330 km by 2021 for a total phased out cost of Rs. Bairagarh and 135 urban-rural villages. A total of 2.161sq km. This has increased Vizag's population by approximately 500.10710 million.72 is observed excluding walk trips. with an average trip length of 5 km. A per capita trip rate of 0. Bhopal: The population of Bhopal Municipal Corporation was 1.000 people. out of which 285 sqkm is municipal area and the rest consists of BHEL Township. The entire project is estimated to cost about Rs. The BRTS will be suitably barriered (at grade) with an estimated carrying capacity of 25. .3 million ( 2001).5 million in 2001. It was recently expanded into Greater Visakha. growing annually at a rate of 4%. The city has about 185 buses and some 3500 minibuses.8 million including walk trips (2001). The network of about 42 km for implementation of BRT has been identified in 8 interconnected corridors with about 4 km as an elevated section in phase 1. Most of the people are dependent on private personal vehicles for their daily commute. incorporating the Steel Plant.7 million vehicular trips are generated every day (2006). It is spread over an area of 11. 7833 million and expected to be start in early 2007 and will be finished by the end of 2008.000 in 2001.

14 = 29. Project is divided in three corridors. Government of India. Two national high ways i. 10. Vijaywada: Vijayawada Municipal Corporation. 4% of the roads have Volume/Capacity Ratio above 1.68 sqkm and population of 10.000 as per census 2001. Slum population 2.16 + 9.e. The population of Rajkot is projected to be 2.71 km.. . footbridges etc.02.00 kms. Ramavarapadu Ring. Total cost of the project: 600 crores. Eluru road. Of area 104. A normative modal share of 40% by the year 2025 based on the recommendations of the Study Group on Alternative Systems or Urban Transport (GOI) was adopted and then assignment was done. estimation trip end models were developed and these were then distributed. Total length of the project: 63 km.371. In first stretch. indicating acute congestion The plan has suggested a Bus Rapid Transit System which would include the conventional road based system supplemented by at grade BRTS along the identified corridors. spreading in 58 sq km area. For travel demand.70 kms.62.70 + 9. At present civic authorities are maintaining the internal roads. NH-5 and NH-9 are passing through the city. 14 Bus stops.20 million by 2021 and the workforce participation rate as 35%.50 KM had been sanctioned as Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) in Vijayawada by the JNNURM. Pilot project of Total Length =10. The proposed corridor is a loop corridor connecting city bus station to Benz circle. The PCTR for the city for the year 2021 is expected to be 1. A pilot corridor for a length of 15. having one million populations has been located on the banks of river Krishna in Andhra Pradesh.02. Railway Station etc. Saynarayana Puram Railway track Road. bridges.Rajkot: Rajkot is capital city of Saurashtra of Gujarat state. Three canals and one rivulet are passing through the city besides the Krishna River. 15 Junctions. The study of the network reflects that 50% of the network is congested. Avg Trip Length 3.

9 398.71 58 26.8 29 23 29.BRT Projects in Different Stages of Implementation City Pune Indore Bhopal Ahmedabad Jaipur Vijayawada Vizag Rajkot Pimpri Chinchwad Surat Total Length of Corridor Cost Rs.7 11.45 21.millions ( KMs) 101.1 55 42.66 8071 985 2378 4933 2192 1526 4529 1100 3121 4690 33525 .

000-25.000 15-40 100 30 Medium (150-200) 15 Medium-low At grade-elevated 2-3 lanes from existing traffic Policy dependent European cities Metro 40.000 30-60 50 20-25 Medium 10-15 Medium-low Elevated 2 lanes Policy dependent Nowhere Flexibility Integration with buses/para transit Low Required Low Required CASE STUDY BRT Systems Currently Operating in Latin America: .crore/km) cost/trip(Rs) Required corridor density (Persons/ha) Required minimum trip length (km) Catchment area Segregation Space required Impact on road traffic Current applications LRT 20.000 24-55 150-300 45-50 High (250-300) 15 Low Elevatedunderground 2 lanes for elevated No impact N.America. Europe limited in Asia Very low Necessary BRT 20.000-35.000 25-30 10-20 10-15 Medium (current Indian cities) 5 High At grade 2-4 lanes Reduced congestion for buses Extensive in Latin America High Desirable Skybus 20.000-70.Viability of BRTS with compared to other transporting system Characteristics Line capacity (Passengers/hr) Commercial speed (km/h) Infrastructure cost (Rs.

financial. environmental. As of April 2005.0 5.BRT has many different dimensions – physical. as shown in Table 1: Table 1: Existing BRT and Busway Systems in Latin America City Metropolitan Population (M) 3. developmental. institutional. and one each in Ecuador. and political – and each city needs to find its own approach when implementing this concept.4 Start of Operation 1974 1976 1977 1979 1981 1982 1985 1995 2000 2003 Number of Busways 6 2 8 8 1 3 1 3 5 3 Length of Busways (km) 65 35 27 142 6 16 5 33 53 26 Curitiba Goiânia Porto Alegre1 São Paulo1 Belo Horizonte1 Recife1 Campinas1 Quito Bogotá León 1 Refers to segregated-busway systems which do not include many other aspects of BRT operation Curitiba.7 2.1 1. This calls for new ideas and experiments.6 8.4 3.9 4. and that is exactly what has been happening in Latin America which in the last decade has become a fascinating urban transport laboratory. Colombia and Mexico.0 20. The busway system .1 1.6 1. social. ten cities are operating some type of BRT and/or busway system – seven of them in Brazil. operational. Brazil: The standards of busways and bus operations passed through many changes and evolved from a “simple” bus line on the first busway in 1974 to a sophisticated BRT system which is now fully integrated with all bus services in the metropolitan area. providing transport anywhere for a single flat fare equivalent to about 74 US Cents.

These 25-meter long buses proved to be very successful. As passenger demand was rising. The Curitiba system continues to be improved. reflecting the elongated shape of Quito’s main urbanized area. without passing lanes at stops – which limits their line-haul capacity. The coagulation of development along five radial busway corridors did in fact occur (Curitiba grew from less than a million to 3 million inhabitants during that period). and (c) the use of specially designed bi-articulated buses capable of carrying 260 passengers each. The first and best known is a trolleybus line (“Trole”) which began operation in late 1995 and subsequently was extended in 2000. It is reported that. The busways are located in the center of the street and have one lane in each direction. have high-platform stops with fare pre-payment. several new features were invented to accommodate the ever increasing passenger volumes. three BRT operations have been implemented. both in terms of economy and passenger acceptance. Ecuador: In the last 10 years.was conceived in the early 1970s as an urban (rather than transport) planning initiative. Summarized in Table 2. Table 2: BRT Lines in Quito. and use articulated buses between the terminals where free transfers are possible to feeder buses. Ecuador . the three lines consist of mostly segregated onelane busways located in the median. (b) the now famous tube stations along the busway which involve high-level boarding and fare prepayment. it consumes less gasoline per capita than other Brazilian cities. Among these were (a) the introduction of express bus services. The second and third are the “Ecovía” and “Central-Norte” corridors. aiming to concentrate population and economic growth along “structural axes” and thus to contain urban sprawl. and a new 22-km long busway is under construction. both served with Euro II Diesel buses. running on parallel (originally uncongested) roads and connecting with the busway every 3-4 km. They run in roughly parallel corridors. in part because more people walk and/or use public transport. each with distinct contractual and operating characteristics. while Curitiba has one of the highest car ownership rates in Brazil. with financial support from the Inter-American Development Bank. Quito. resulting in a unique urban structure of a star-like high-density development which proves to be highly efficient transport-wise. all trunk-line services are now provided by nearly 250 of these biarticulated buses.

The weekday flow has been forecast to reach 420. 2000 17 90% +1 3 28 no 113 right 89 15 240. The current arrangements are the result of separate business negotiations with individual groups of private bus operators that had to be coaxed into . and includes three major terminals permitting free transfers to/from feeder buses. and 152 standard-sized feeder buses. SOURCE: Dirección Metropolitana de Transporte y Vialidad.000 2. and passengers cannot transfer between them even though at two locations some lines pass through the same street.location of bus doors Number of integrated feeder buses Commercial trunk-line speed (km/h) Weekday passenger volume Infrastructure cost (million US$/km) 1 Ecovía 1995. Distinct from the other BRT systems in Latin America. the Trole is government-owned and operated.000 1. located in the middle of relatively wide avenues. electrical infrastructure and rolling stock are included. stations and other civil works. When overhead wires. Upon its completion.Trole Year opened Length (km) .2 2004 11 95% +8 4 24 yes 34 right 67 20 73. the two more recent Diesel-bus BRT lines are operated by private consortia under 12year concessions. this comes at the price of a somewhat restricted line-haul capacity (about 8. It also passes through the historic city center – included in UNESCO’s World Heritage List –which has an intricate system of streets that are rarely wider than two lanes. Unfortunately. there is no operational integration among the three lines at this stage. providing high-quality public transport access to an area that is more suitable for pedestrian movement than motor vehicles.3 Because of the fairly recent busway completion (late 2004).000 1.of which segregated + extensions by 2006 (km) Number of terminals Number of intermediate stops Passing lanes at stops? Number of trunk-line buses . 2 This covers busway.000 passengers per hour per direction) and a relatively low commercial bus speed (10 km/h in the central area.1 million/km. Here the BRT demonstrates its flexibility. the main reason why the overall terminal-toterminal speed is “only” 15 km/h). April 2005 The Trole runs mostly on a fully segregated busway.000 passengers.0 2 Central-Norte1 2003 9 >95% +4 2 16 no 42 left 40 17 55. the Central-Norte system is expected to include 84 articulated trunk-line buses. however. data on bus operations are still quite preliminary. the total cost amounts to US $5. Quito.

Colombia: TransMilenio is the highest-volume BRT system anywhere. and terminals adapted to articulated buses (160 passengers). . virtually completing Phase 1 of the project. parks. using segregated busways. The first Phase 2 busway began operation in 2003. another two-lane (1+1) busway opened in August 2001.e. bikeways and mixed-traffic streets. the project was not only designed as a transport scheme but was part of a comprehensive city upgrading program to improve public space in general. Quito intends to address this lack of integration which is mostly due to institutional (rather than technical) reasons. The main four-lane (2+2) busways of TransMilenio were inaugurated in December 2000. The construction costs quoted in this paper include these extra works built in addition to the BRT infrastructure in the corridors in question. Detail planning for Phase 3 is underway. Similar to Curitiba.collaborating with the BRT reform. and construction is well-advanced on the two remaining busways: they next 10 km are expected to open in August 2005. Bogotá. i. The new system was rapidly accepted by the population. The basic characteristics of Phases 1 and 2 are shown in Table 3. stations. and has become a model which many transport planners elsewhere are trying to emulate in their cities. sidewalks. and fare-integrated operations with smaller buses in the outskirts of the city. and Phase 2 should be fully operational in early 2006. less than three years after the system was conceived.

7 Phase 2(b)2 2005-063 2 29 100% 3 34 198 n/a n/a 380.000 2003 1 13 100% 2 16 137 1464 23 32 250.000 bus-km run) concessions were signed for the trunk-line services of Phases 1 and 2. Colombia Phase 1 Year opened Number of busways Length (km) of which segregated Number of terminals and transfer stations Number of standard stations Number of trunk-line buses Number of integrated feeder buses Commercial speed (all-stop buses) (km/h) Commercial speed (express buses) (km/h) Weekday passenger volume Peak-hour directional volume Infrastructure cost (million US$/km) 5. The originally unexpected profitability of the BRT services can be explained by the much higher bus productivity under the new system: While traditional .000 10. proved to be highly successful. The bus concessions.Avenidas Suba & Norte-Quito-Sur 3.0005 1Avenida Américas 2. under which the private operator had to procure and finance the buses. so much so that commercial banks.2 35. seven (10year. which had been reluctant to enter into this business for the Phase 1 contracts. then 10-year) concessions for the feeder bus services.5-km section to suburban Soacha is expected to open in 2007 4. In transparent bidding processes. With the help of a competent professional team and first-rate consultants. and two (10-year) concessions for the fare collection services. All of Phase 2 While the physical aspects of TransMilenio are impressive enough. the main pioneering achievements are its institutional and regulatory features. including the provision of turnstiles and smart cards. were keen to provide loans to the winners of the Phase 2 contracts.Table 3: TransMilenio BRT System in Bogotá. six (initially 4-year.8 Phase 2(a)1 2000 4 42 94% 8 53 470 235 21 32 770.An additional 5.0006 32. based on 750. a new business model was devised and implemented to reform a chaotic private bus service industry which consisted of thousands of small enterprises with many individual bus owners and operators.0006 15.

The latter has obviously been closed to general traffic. Layout of Busways: While most early bus lanes and busways were in the curb lanes of major avenues. limited stop and express services.600 passengers per day. various operational features have been developed and fine-tuned – most of them pioneered in Brazil and Bogotá – which give BRT its distinctive image and high productivity. the new trunk line buses serve more than 1. While wide avenues are needed so standard busways can be fitted in. a street barely wider than 3 meters. but there are also remarkable and well-functioning bus-only streets in Bogotá and Curitiba. now widely accepted to reduce bus delays and increase busway capacity. What is Different about Latin American BRTs ? Over the last decade. . even between stations. virtually all new segregated busways have been placed in the median – permitting high commercial bus speeds but requiring passengers to cross the street in order to reach the bus stations. Another innovation are extra bus overtaking lanes at stations. Foremost among these is the Quito Trole which passes through a historical center. high-level “metro-like” entry into buses. there have been several imaginative solutions to adapt BRT-ways to the relatively narrow streets of commercial or historical city centers. utilizing many 7-meter wide streets and. often through lefthand doors from centrally located bus stations. Table 5 summarizes these features for the major existing systems. high-capacity trunk-line buses (articulated or bi-articulated). permitting higher commercial speeds and passenger volumes than observed in most metros – despite the traffic signals at intersections. and those that are being implemented.buses carry less than 350 passengers on a typical weekday. four-lane (2+2) busways for high-demand corridors. and similar bus-cumpedestrian streets are being implemented in six other Colombian cities. and prepayment of fares. bus overtaking at stops. Some high-demand busways in Bogotá. Lima and Santiago have two segregated lanes in each direction. Among these are feeder-trunk operation. in a short section.

passengers can quickly enter and leave the bus – similar to a typical metro – which contributes to the high commercial speeds observed for almost all Latin American BRTs. calling for special station platforms of the same height. Another distinct feature of Latin America’s BRTs is the use of very large buses for their trunk routes. As a result. Trunk and feeder ? Curitiba Goiânia São Paulo passa rápido Quito Trole Quito Ecovía Quito CentralNorte Bogotá León Yes Passing lane at stations ? no no partly 2+2 lane busways ? no no no Express bus services ? . single-articulated and standard buses all operate on the passa-rápido corridors. the busway corridors. either 12-meter long articulated buses with a capacity of about 160 passengers. Moreover. (4) Bi-articulated. . built after 1998). but separated from. (2) Bi-articulated buses.3 km. (3) Only on the Anhangüeira busway (13. with a capacity of about 260 passengers. buses are built on truck chassis and are thus less costly than low-floor buses.(1) no yes Articulated buses ? yes partly yes (2) yes(3) yes(4) Highlevel bus entry ? yes yes (3) no Bus entry from left ? no yes(3) yes Fare prepayment ? yes yes (3) no Yes yes yes Yes Yes no no Yes no no no no no yes yes Yes yes Yes Yes Yes no yes no Yes yes Yes yes yes Yes yes Yes yes yes yes yes no no no Yes yes Table 5: Design Features of Latin American BRT Systems (1) Curitiba operates express services on mixed-traffic streets parallel to.Buses and Stations: Except for Santiago and São Paulo. about 90 cm above street level. or the 18meter long bi-articulated buses of Curitiba and São Paulo. all new BRT systems use buses with high-level entry.

Partly for the same reason. Metros throughout the world have their passengers purchase or validate their tickets before reaching the station platform.e. i.e. whereby trunk-line buses go beyond the busway. were so obvious that almost all new systems. the delays associated with on-board fare collection (instead of prepayment before entry into the station) become a significant system liability. As shown in the table above.The first two large-scale BRTs (Curitiba and Quito’s Trole) had the bus doors on the “conventional” side. The advantages of that arrangement. providing direct service to outlying zones. the right.500 passengers per hour per direction. In 2000. requiring left-hand doors for all trunk-line buses. much thought has been given on how to combine bus services in the high-flow corridors radiating from the city center with those in lower-density zones. sometimes also called “open system”. savings in physical space and station personnel. and • Direct services. all but two of the new BRTs (the exceptions being São Paulo and Santiago) require fare prepayment before entering the bus station. there are two basic options: • Feeder-trunk services. sometimes also called “closed system”. whereby high-capacity buses operate only on trunk busways ending in terminals where passengers transfer to/from smaller feeder buses. i.6 Feeder-Trunk Bus Services: When planning the BRT systems. Santiago has right-hand boarding throughout the system). three of the new BRTs will operate trunk-line buses beyond the busway terminals to serve passenger stops in mixed-traffic streets. have been using the left-door standard. Bogotá’s TransMilenio applied the concept of twodirectional bus stations in the road median. or leave it at intermediate points. . a second set of step-down right-hand doors will thus be added to the buses serving those stops (in Cartagena and Bucaramanga. Goiânia estimates that. thus permitting rapid entry into the metro car. once passenger flows exceed 2. with the exception of Santiago and Quito’s third busway. As detailed in a new BRT Planning Manual7.

this is equal to or faster than 7 of the 14 metro systems in developing countries studied in 1990 by TRRL. Bogotá also employs station assistants to help passengers with the confusing array of possible combinations of local and limitedstop services along the same corridor. most trunk line buses terminate at outlying terminals where passengers can transfer to local bus services.8 It is expected that Lima’s new BRT will also make extensive use of limited-stop services. both passengers and operators can benefit from the provision of services that skip intermediate stops. . Both Bogotá and Lima include real-time control. For many passengers. express services that skip all stations between a peripheral area and a central district can provide a high-grade passenger service while simultaneously raising bus productivity.Experience with traditional busways in Brazil. it was concluded that the transfer time penalty incurred under the closed system would be more than offset by the higher commercial speed along the main busways. Thus. Limited-stop services thus work best in conjunction with vehicle tracking technology that permits a central control team to oversee and direct vehicle movements. Limited-stop and Express Bus Services: Often. with more than half of its passengers using one of ten such services which operate at an average commercial speed of 32 km per hour – despite frequent stops at traffic signals along the route. Bogotá (pre-2000) and Lima demonstrated that it is difficult to control trunk-line operations under an open system. Bogotá’s TransMilenio has been demonstrating the merits of limited-stop and express services. with “bunching” of vehicles occurring along the busway which can severely reduce commercial speeds. relatively few major stations predominate as the intended destination of customers. Even in Santiago and São Paulo’s passa-rápido system. While limited-stop services provide much amenity value to the passenger. stopping at each intermediate station adds significantly to the overall travel time with relatively little commercial benefit to the system operators. In the planning of almost all recent BRTs. which have chosen to operate under an open system. Similarly. using GPS technology. as well as several of the Colombian cities where such systems are being implemented. they introduce greater complexity in managing the coordination of vehicles on the same corridor with different travel characteristics.

A recently published manual for inclusive design in the transport field singles out the BRTs of Curitiba. audio announcements and tactile strips for blind people.Access for Persons with Disabilities: The level bus access from high-station platforms has opened new opportunities to provide public transport for wheelchair users or others with walking disabilities. and station assistants to help persons with perceptive disabilities. in the case of Curitiba.9 The station platforms of all BRTs are accessible from the ground level via ramps or. . small lifts. a study is currently underway to define specific inclusive design guidelines for BRTs. In the context of the new systems being implemented in six Colombian cities. additional features include one turnstile per station wide enough for wheelchairs. Bogotá and Quito as good examples.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful